Why It’s Time Black People Simply Disengage With White People In Discussing Race

I think it is equally as arrogant, or perhaps more so, to make assumptions about someone's faith without knowing anything about them.

What qualifies someone to define what a "Christian" is?

I'm baptized.... is that good enough?

I went to Preschool and Kindergarten at a Christian school, still not enough?

I went to a Lutheran church for years, and I went through the confirmation process, do I get to have an opinion now, or do you not consider Lutheran to be part of Christianity?

Your definition of Christianity is your opinion. Just because you think the Westboro Baptist Church doesn't truly follow the teachings of Christ doesn't mean that they don't fall under the Christian faith. The Catholic Church has committed countless atrocities throughout history in the name of Christ, would you not consider them Christian? I get that you don't want to claim the bad apples because you don't think they follow the true teachings of Christ, but that's not your decision to make.

 

It's my decision but I've been slacking on the job

 

Where's Jesus H Christ when you need him.........................

 

I guess I don't understand the point of arguing. It's not about whether they're doing it right, or who is the true believer.... If you follow Christ you are, by definition, a Christian. How you do it is up to you and your particular denomination. It's the same with Islam and Buddhism and Hinduism. There's a reason why each religion has so many interpretations. There isn't a "right one." Well, I guess each person thinks they are following "the right one," but are you arguing that your faith is the one true faith? Is that why we're having this problem?

Also, I could make a pretty solid argument that the hate groups like Westboro are much more historically accurate in their portrayal of Christianity.

Couple examples for ya:

The Crusades

The Spanish Inquisition

The Salem Witch Trial

A lot of uncool shit has been done in the name of God and the name of Christ. While I agree with you that those people clearly aren't following the true teachings of Jesus (love your brother, judge not, etc), it's still part of the Christian history. And while I'm sure you'd love to wipe those events from the history books because you don't think they reflect the true teachings of Christ, they happened and I would hope that they, along with douchebags like Westboro, server as a reminder of the darker side of organized religion. People will interpret a message differently. Some Christians do good things, while others do bad things. It's the same with Islam. Millions of really good Muslims, but also quite a few bad ones.

 

All O'Reilly is, or ever has been, is a bag of hot air.

Hillary has been a part of actual damage to this country. Long lasting, life impacting, criminally negligent damage.

If you're going to defend Clinton, someone who was against equal rights for gay people.... well...... I don't know what to tell you.

 

Because it seems to me that you're making it a debate over what's the correct way to be a Muslim, or the correct way to be a Christian. I.E. if you don't follow Christ or Mohammed in this way, you're not really a member of that faith. Or at least you're defending people who would have that opinion.

Would the attackers on 9/11 consider themselves Muslim? I'm sure they would probably say the exact same thing that you're saying. That Muslims who do not believe as they do are not Muslims at all. So rather than argue over which Muslim is a true Muslim, why aren't they all Muslims?

This stance by the people who disagree seems..... I'm not sure of the best way to put this...... narrow minded? I'm not trying to be insulting. I just don't understand how this is something that can be debated. If they're not Muslims, what are they? That's an honest question. What would you call them? They follow the teachings of Mohammed (as interpreted by them) and they believe in Allah. I'm just not sure what more they need to be classified as a Muslim. It seems more like the masses want to reject those people because it makes them look bad, but in my opinion the dark underbelly of organized religion is there, and people should stop pretending like it doesn't exist. There IS a negative interpretation of the Bible, or the Koran. That's the problem with taking a book written thousands of years ago literally.

I can understand why people would want to erase the embarrassing moments from their past, but if Christians chose to disregard the darker periods in their history, it would marginalize the growth and evolution of their religion. So if Muslims refuse to claim the radical side of Islam, they're never going to grow past it.

 

Plat and I are debating whether the attackers should be called Muslims at all. Whether the majority had anything to do with it is not even a part of this discussion. He is saying that he understands why some people would argue that 9/11 wasn't done by Muslims. I disagree.

 

Actually a lot of members of faiths have doubts about their faith from time to time...they are still members of their religions

 

I apologize Riverman, but I'm not really seeing how this is relevant to the topic.

 

After thinking about it more, I have an answer for this:

The individual gets to decide if they are or are not Christian or Muslim.

Nobody can tell someone they're not Christian. They can't tell them they're not Muslim. If someone self-identifies as a Muslim, then they are a Muslim, and how they interpret that religion is up to them.

That's my answer.

 

It's all good, but for the record, theological discussions have little to do with the topic of this thread at all....you said faith determines membership, I said you can be a member and lose faith from time to time....hope that clarifies my post for you

 

But that's entirely the point. People get to decide for themselves. It's not up to others to decide whether you are or are not a member of that faith. People are selectively choosing not to recognize others as Christians or Muslims because they're embarrassed by how those groups behave. How they represent their religion. And while I can sympathize with their reasons, I do not agree that they can pick and choose what defines a member.

 

It just seems like the left is so concerned with not insulting Muslims that they won't even admit that the attackers were Muslim at all, albeit of the radical kind.